[Anacharsis] laughed at [Solon] for imagining the dishonesty and covetousness of his countrymen could be restrained by written laws, which were like spiders' webs, and would catch, it is true, the weak and poor, but easily be broken by the mighty and rich.

To this Solon rejoined that men keep their promises when neither side can get anything by the breaking of them; and he would so fit his laws to the citizens, that all should understand it was more eligible to be just than to break the laws. But the event rather agreed with the conjecture of Anacharsis than Solon's hope.

Thanks to my colleague and former teacher Bill McGovern for the pointer.

The point, as I read it, is similar to that of Albert Jay Nock's book Our Enemy, The State: namely, that the State has always originated and still consists, not in an effort to restrain the stronger/richer from exploiting the weaker/poorer, but in the project of enabling the stronger/richer to more effectively oppress and exploit the weaker/poorer. It's good to see a "respectable" libertarian making that point.

The ability to evade laws is a good like any other, and thus more readily available to those with the means to purchase greater amounts of goods. Very nice quote. I shall have to read more Plutarch.

Eh, sort of. But the so-called "elite" getting away with violating laws isn't just a capitalist phenomenon, it happens with the "elites" in communist countries as well. The only difference is that in communist countries the majority of people are poor, often miserable, and often starving, and the number of "the elite class" is smaller.

American Psikhushka: sometimes the "means to purchase greater amounts of goods" isn't money, but position in the ruling party. Still, as I recall, the Soviet elites did actually end up with more money in particular.

I'm waiting for David Bernstein to get in high dudgeon and hammer Prof. Volokh for consorting with and posting Anacharsis' slanderous denigration of Greeks as too dishonest and covetous to abide by laws.

In fact, any candidate enjoying the good Professor's endorsement ought to immediately denounce him in a windy press release and completely disassociate from anything UCLA related.